Law&Crime Sidebar - Top 5 Shocking Testimonies from Alex Murdaugh’s Family Murders Trial — Week Three

Episode Date: February 13, 2023

Numerous witnesses of Alex Murdaugh’s other alleged crimes took the stand and testified against the disgraced lawyer last week. The jury learned of financial fraud committed in the Mallory Beach case, along with firsthand testimony from Murdaugh’s housekeeper and the caretaker of his mother that may be incriminating. The Law&Crime Network’s Jesse Weber breaks down the top five shocking testimonies from week three of Alex Murdaugh’s family murders trial.LAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergVideo Editing - Michael DeiningerGuest Booking - Alyssa FisherSocial Media Management - Vanessa Bein & Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieObjectionsThey Walk Among AmericaCoptales and CocktailsThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller

that will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. The particle lift that was taken from the defendant Alex Murna. So one particle lift was collected from his right hand and one from his left hand. One particle characteristic of gunshot primer residue was found. It's a recap of week three of the Alec Murdoch murder trial and bombshell testimony from a caretaker and housekeeper may have changed this whole case. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by law and crime. I'm Jesse Weber.

Well, it's another week and a lot more to talk about in the Alec Murdoch trial. The former renowned South Carolina attorney is accused of murdering his wife, Maggie, and son Paul by shooting them to death in June 2021 on their family property. the defense has insisted that the circumstantial evidence doesn't line up against their client and that he had no reason to kill them. Week three in the can, let's do a recap five major moments that went down in court. And first up, big win for the prosecution. Judge Clifton Newman allowed the financial crimes evidence to come in. You see, the motive put forward by the prosecution is that at the time of the killings, Murdoch was about to be exposed. There were inquiries into his finances. It was going to be revealed that he had been stealing money.

from his law firms, from his clients. And one of the big issues was he was also facing a multimillion dollar lawsuit stemming from a 2019 boat crash that killed teenager Mallory Beach. His son, Paul, was allegedly the drunk driver of the boat? So was he stealing money? Was he hiding money? Well, as a way to draw attention away from all that, by himself sometime, he killed his family.

That's the theory put forward by the prosecution. Now, the defense has maintained that this motive doesn't make sense. It's not connected to the murders. and that by allowing in all of this evidence about alleged financial crimes, it is going to prejudice the jury against their client. Well, the judge didn't quite agree with the defense. I find that the jury is entitled to consider whether the apparent desperation of Mr. Murdo because of his dire financial situation,

the threat of being exposed for committing the crimes which he was later charged with resulted in the commission of the alleged crimes. While motive is not a necessary element, the state must prove malice and evidence of motive may be used. to prove it. And in this case, since the identity of the perpetrator is a critical element that must be proven beyond the reasonable doubt, evidence of motive may be used in an attempt to meet that burden. Now, it should be noted that the jury is to be instructed that they can't consider this as propensity evidence, right? Well, Murdoch, he's a bad guy.

He stole money. He lied. Then he must have killed his family. that's not allowed. That's not the connection the jury can make. The jury can't do that. The evidence is only to be allowed in and to be considered by the jury

as a way to show the intent behind him killing his family. And with that, we heard from some critical witnesses. One witness, the CFO of Alec Murdoch's former law firm, who confronted him on the day of the killings hours before Maggie and Paul were killed about missing money. When we went in his office, I said, I told him, I said, I have reason to believe that you received the fairest money directly to you and you need to prove to me that you did not. And he assured me again that the money was in there. I told him I still needed to see the ledgers or proof that it was.

After the murders happened, was anybody at all concerned about getting the proof for those missing fees after those murders happened at that point in time? We weren't because we were concerned about Alec. He wasn't working a whole lot. He was erratic. We knew he was taking pills. We were just worried about his sanity. So we weren't going to go in there and harass him about money when we were worried about his mental state and the fact that his family had been killed.

Then there was Alex's former paralegal who testified about missing. fees. She thought maybe Alec just misplaced the checks, that he was kind of a whirling dervish. She was all over the place. Well, again, what happened with those inquiries? Did that, did the law firm community rally to the aid of the defendant? They did. Was that the primary focus on everybody's mind in the aftermath? Absolutely. Were you at all concerned about finding out what happened at these fairs fees after?

that happened? What fairs fees? And she would testify that she would discover months after the killings that Murdoch was allegedly not telling the truth and stealing money because she discovered one of those missing checks. And then there's Mark Tinsley. Tinsley is the civil lawyer that was representing the Beach family in the boating crash lawsuit. He was pursuing a wrongful death lawsuit against Alec Murdoch. But once again, the timing becomes key. On your assessment of the boat case and how everything fit together, if things were how they initially appeared? It would have affected, I mean, yes, it did, and it would have ended the case. It would have ended the case against two?

Against Alex Martin. And explain that to the jury. Why? What had changed after this terrible tragedy? Well, when you have a civil case, if you, nice people get good. good verdicts. Okay, just generally speaking. Yes, sir. Nice people get good verdicts. You really have to motivate a jury to want to help somebody in a civil case. And so if you compare, say, Attila the Hun with some sweet grandmother, who gets a better

result? It's the sweet grandmother. If Ehrlich is the victim of a vigilante, nobody's going to hold him accountable. It doesn't make any difference to what he did. or how clearly what he did contributed, the case would be over against Deleck. This is also important. It's important because as a result of the deaths, what happened? The inquiries stopped. If you believe the prosecution's motive that he killed his family to buy himself time, to stop the questions, to prevent his exposure, to gain sympathy,

you have to say, well, in a way, it worked. Now, another major moment in week three was the testimony of Michelle Shelly Smith. She was the caretaker of Alex's mother who had Alzheimer's. Now, remember what Alex alibi was in the night of killings. His alibi was that on the night of the killings, the family had a dinner. He stayed inside while Paul and Maggie went down to the kennels. He took a nap and then went to visit his sick mother, then came back to the property where he found his family dead. So Smith says, when he showed up, he was fidgety.

Okay. Well, then again, on cross, she said, this just might be who Alec is. He was always that kind of way. She did say it was unusual for him to visit that late. Then again, his father was sick in the hospital. Could argue it was a difficult time for him. But this is really the critical moment. How long was Alec Murdoch at his parents' home?

and what did Alec Murdoch allegedly want Smith to say about how long he was at the house? How long did he stay in the room with y'all? I say y'all, for the record, you and Ms. Libby, I apologize to him. About 15 to 20 minutes, 20 minutes. He was telling you or saying to you that he was at the house? When? The night of the murders.

The night of the murders? Yes. What was he telling you about that he was at the house the night of the murder? That he had been in 30 to 40 minutes. And what did he say about your marriage, your upcoming potential marriage? I heard you was getting married. I said, yes. He said, if I could, he would let me know because the wedding's going to be expensive.

Well, thank you. The wedding is going to be expensive? He said, he's going to be expensive. That's one, thank you. Did he offer to help? Yes, he offered. That's the type of person, a good person. And have you ever mentioned the wedding to you before?

No. So the idea here being, he was trying to not only, get her to say he was at the house longer, but seemingly was trying to buy her off. Or, as the defense would ask under Cross, maybe he was just being a nice guy. That's something for the jury to consider. She also testified that after the killing, she observed Alec Murdoch carrying what she thought was a blue tarp into the home. Prosecution says it was actually a blue raincoat. Defense says, no, she said it's a tarp, which was also recovered from the parents' home. It's going to be, again, enough to a jury to decide what she actually saw. But why is a blue raincoat so important?

We'll listen to forensic scientist Megan Fletcher from the South Carolina law enforcement division or sled. And what, after your examination, what were your results? Particles characteristic of gunshot primorized residue were also found on the interior of this jacket. Is there a certain number or could you have kept checking and checking? Was there a lot of gunshot, primary residue inside the inside of the jacket? I would say there were a significant number of particles of particles characteristic of gunshot primary residue on the inside of this jacket, yes. How mean did you determine? I confirmed 38 particles characteristic. At least 38 gunshot residue

particles were found on the inside of the jacket. This jacket allegedly stashed away at the Murdox parent and Murdoch's parents' home. And she would say it is consistent with someone using the jacket to wrap up a gun. Now, by the way, that's not the only place where they found GSR. GSR was found on Murdoch's hands, shorts, t-shirt, seatbelt. Now, the fence made a good point because they said this expert couldn't to say how or when the GSR was transferred, which is important because this is a family that had a lot of guns and would hunt.

How unusual is it for there to be GSR? I will also say that Agent Fletcher testified that the white shirt that Murdoch was wearing had a strong smell of detergent. The idea here being, did he clean his shirt to get rid of biological evidence? Well, let's move on to another major witness, and that was the Murdoch family housekeeper Blanca Simpson. Blanca Simpson, big witness. So she testified that Alec was the one who summoned Paul and Maggie back to the house

on the night of the murders. That is big. That is big. In fact, it seemed Maggie didn't even want to go. She testified that she prepared dinner for the family, but wasn't there to watch them eat. In fact, when she came back to the house, the day after the killing, she said it was strange to find pots of the food in the fridge. The family would normally leave everything out. It was also curious that Murdoch asked her to clean the house.

There's a murder investigation going on, outstanding question of why he wanted her to do that and how the police. would let that happen. She also noted how it was weird to see Maggie's pajamas folded neatly in a doorway. Again, another thing that seemed out of place for the family. But then she notices something else. On the floor next to the shower was a slight puddle of water, a towel, and a pair of khaki pants. And then as I went to the left to see there was any else that was out. I looked in the closet and in the closet was a white damp towel on the floor. The question of did Alec Murdoch clean his clothes, wash away evidence, maybe get Simpson to clean them. That has become a point of conversation and contention. And by the way,

Simpson said she never observed blood on the khaki pants. And the reason this is all important is because in a Snapchat video taken off of Paul's phone, about an hour or so before when the prosecutors say the killings took place, you can see Alec Murdoch wearing khaki pants and this seafone shirt. And that brings me now to this back and forth about what Alec Murdoch was wearing on the day in question and what he was seen wearing in the Snapchat video. And he said, B, I need to talk to you. And he said, come here, sit down. So I went in the living room, I sat down, and he was pacing back and forth in the living room. And he said, I got a bad feeling.

He said, I got a bad feeling. He said, something's not right. And then he said, well, you know, there's a video. There was a video that was out. I hadn't seen a video. And he said, you remember the shirt I was wearing that Vinnie Vine shirt? Those were, that's what he said to me. And in my mind, I was saying I don't remember Vinnie Vine's shirt.

It was the polo shirt, but I didn't mention. He said, well, you know what I was wearing that shirt? He said, you know, in the, that day. And still, I was just, I didn't say anything, but I was kind of thrown back because I don't remember that. I don't remember him wearing that shirt that day when he left. I know what shirt he was wearing because I fixed the collar, and the collars are different material. And I don't know what a Viti Vine shirt is.

But when he left that day, was he wearing a Veney virene shirt? Or was he wearing the collar you can describe? It was a polo shirt. It's using your common sense that it appeared to you. He was trying to tell you to say, I was wearing the shirt. That way. The objection is sustained as to the form of the question. How did you take that conversation?

I felt like he was, I felt like, I felt confused at first and then I know what he was wearing the day he left the house and I was basically confused. I didn't really know whether he was trying to get me to say that that shirt was if I was to be asked that if that was a shirt he was wearing. The polo shirt that she saw him wearing wasn't the Vineyard Vineyard Vine shirt was Alec Murdoch trying to get her to say something, trying to get her to say he was wearing something that he wasn't in that Snapchat video taken from Paul's phone. Again, recorded an hour before the killings.

That seafone shirt that he was wearing in that video, by the way, has never been found. And we know that when police were interviewing him later on in the night, he was wearing a white t-shirt and shorts, completely different outfit. Now, Simpson would also provide key testimony as well about Alec and Maggie's relationship. You see, the defense has made the point that the Murdox were a happy family, that Alec had no reason to kill his wife and son. Well, Simpson provided some interesting insights about that. She was, what was she anxious about? She said she knew the amount of money that they were asking, but she felt that Alec was not being truthful to her with regard.

to what exactly was going on with that lawsuit. She said he doesn't tell me everything. So Maggie was seemingly worried about finances in this legal issue. Argument could be maybe things weren't picture perfect. Maybe she was realizing something was up with Alec. And then there is this, what Simpson discovered in Maggie's car a week after the killings. And what did you find, if anything? But she still had paint for the Edisto house that she was trying to touch up some areas at the house.

And she had some pillows that she was going to return. And as I moved the seat to clean, to vacuum underneath the driver's side seat, I found her ring. Now, I know married couples that misplaced their wedding rings all the time. But given the context of everything, given she didn't want to come back to the person, property that night could it mean something more could it mean there was trouble in their relationship could it be a motive to kill i'll tell you the defense asked for a mistrial at one point when this evidence was coming in the judge allowed it in overall if you ask me seem to be a strong week for the prosecution let's see where the case goes next and that's all we have for you here

on sidebar everybody thank you so much for joining us please subscribe on apple podcast spotify youtube wherever you get your podcast i'm jesse weber i'll speak to you next time You can binge all episodes of this law and crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.